Screener
EFRA vs CGW
iShares Environmental Infrastructure and Industrials ETF vs Invesco S&P Global Water Index ETF
Key differences
- EFRA costs 0.11% less per year.
- CGW is significantly larger than EFRA — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, EFRA has delivered higher annualized returns.
- CGW has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| EFRA | CGW | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.47% | 0.58% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $6M | $1.0B |
| Since | 2022 | 2007 |
| Dividend yield | 1.56% | 1.53% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | global | — |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +11.8% | +5.5% |
| CAGR 3Y | +11.7% | +10.0% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +5.6% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.58 | 0.49 |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.09% | 13.38% |
| Max drawdown | -16.25% | -35.72% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to EFRA and CGW
Explore further